Skip to main content

About your Search

20121204
20121204
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10
% of our fiscal problem is on the spending side. obama is being very inflexible on that. republicans i'm afraid will get taken to the cleaners just what happened in 1990 when read myips. melissa: would you rather we went over the fiscal cliff? >> compared to what obama's talking about, the fiscal cliff might be better because obama not only wants soak the rich tax increases that would automatically happen, he then wants additional taxes on top of that would be very bad for american competitiveness. we don't want to send jobs to china and india but almost as if obama wants to do that. at least if w went over the cliff, we would get the sequester, which is the budget wonk term for automatic reductions in the growth of spending. melissa: absolutely but i'm not sure republicans are giving in as much as you think. ifou drill down on the details, as soon as i saw 800 billion in new x revenue, my immediate question did they give on the point of marginal rat d from the language it doesn't look like. more a tax code basically closes loopholes. they employ all the euphemisms to say you will get
hand, particularly since the republicans outraised obama 5-1 on wall street which is a real reverse since 2008. the markets are so upset with the minimal oversight that the administration has put on them that they've swung to the g.o.p. camp this time, and they're not going to buckle on that. >> eliot: brian, let me come back to a political-type question. defense cuts, another area where the democrats are saying we have the opportunity sequestration imposes more significant cuts in the military. many think that's a good thing to do. barney frank every chance you give him he'll talk loudly why it's the correct thing to do. is there a chance that the republicans will give him that one? >> it depends on what happens between now and the first of the year. if you go over the cliff and all the tax cuts expire and sequestration takes affect, that gives the president the ability to reorganize the defense budget in a way that tracks what he wants to do with the military spending, which is to slow the growth or even to freeze the growth in real terms. if they cut a deal beforehand and then pu
'd think we would have somewhere to begin negotiations. the white house says what republicans have offered isn't even a start. six governors, democrats, and republicans weigh in on the fiscal cliff today. what will they tell president obama about the spending cuts and tax increases now just 28 days away? >> we must reign in our out of control spending. >> reporter: republicans have an offer, $800 billion in new taxes, half what the president wanted. $600 billion saved in part by making americans wait until they're 67 to get medicare. plus more cuts totalling $2.2 trillion. but no tax hikes for the wealthy. >> that's just not going to happen. >> reporter: the pentagon could take the biggest hit from president obama told defense experts monday, don't worry. >> even as we make very tough fiscal choices, we're going to keep investing in these programs. >> reporter: he went online on youtube and twitter explaining why he thinks the rich should pay more. going over the fiscal cliff could cost america jobs. >> we're only expanding 2% right now. it needs to be considerably higher to bring more peo
obama. the different in dollars. the president wants $800 billion more in tax increases. the republicans want approximately more a trillion dollars more spending cuts. that's the difference between the two sides just in dollar terms. there is a difference between the two sides in terms of principle. the principle centers on higher tax rates, yes or no. speaker boehner many latest offer is raise $800 billion mostly from the wealthy by limiting deductions. the president says, no, don't want that. we want to tax the rich with higher tax rates on the rich. we have a dollar difference, a difference in principle. martha: we are hung up on ideology here. if you can get the money one way and it produces a long lasting change to the tax code which both sides say they want, what seems to be the problem? >> reporter: it's ideology. the president one the elect, he says he won it on taxing the rich. he want to win the debate. whether it's the best solutioner to the economy is an entirely different story. this is a political and ideological argument and we'll see who wins. martha: there is a couple wa
this is bad, but a top obama aide told chuck todd if these republicans were in power when abraham lincoln was there, there would still be slavery. does that help the process move along or does it hurt? >> reading it between the lines. i think that's a bad omen. we still have four weeks, though. >> yeah, absolutely. we have i believe 27 negotiating days. >> there is a rule in it life -- >> what is that rule? >> i think slavery analogies and hitler jokes never work out well. >> you don't do that. >> it never ends well. >> if you're a reporter, you do not need to sort of badge aer people at the white house or on the hill for negative stuff about the other side. they are reaching out to affirmatively blast -- >> who is they? >> people are looking for opportunities to blast the other side. >> the white house offer, the first offer, was in bad faith. it was pathetic. >> first offer? >> the counteroffer was in bad faith and pathetic. >> they released it to the press, i believe, before to the white house which i think is just -- >> it doesn't matter. these are two really pathetic offers. >> this
that they should agree with president obama and extend the tax cuts for middle-class americans and then fight later on for that tax cut for the wealthy. we will ask him about this latest proposal, the counterproposal from the house republicans. j.d. on twitter says -- on our republican , richard from colorado springs, colorado. caller: c-span could put on actual science. i think there is a lot of magical thinking on the part of democrats here. first of all, they are assuming if they raise the taxes on this one%, it will not affect the jobs and the companies that they work for. nor would it affect the customers they have. what are the percentages of the most important job creators around? how did you identify them? they had no clue. i think the other aspect of magical thinking is that in the noise and the signal, nate silver pointed out previously a 12% rise in gdp might ake for a 2% rise in employment. in 2005, we got 3.5 million jobs lost. it is a fantasy to believe that the president's spending is going to make employment rise more. recently, there has been an article by a harvard university law
have to rise on the top 2%. there's no other way to do it. >> reporter: president obama says his plan will raise taxes on the rich, bringing in $1.6 trillion. republicans want to close tax loopholes and eliminate deductions, which they say will raise $800 billion in new revenue. >> the president has a huge responsibility to work together with congress and find a solution to avert the fiscal cliff. >> reporter: and they say it's now up to the president to find a plan that can pass both chambers of congress. so now that each side has rejected the other's first offer, it's going to be interesting and important to watch the timing of the next offer on the part of the white house to really try to figure out, terrell, how far both sides are willing to take us toward that cliff. >> and which side has the edge at this point. susan mcginnis in washington this morning. thank you so much. >>> iran says this morning it's captured a united states drone flying over iranian air space. the drone was reportedly gathering information over the persian gulf when it was captured by iranian naval units. in
to make a deal can't make a deal. yesterday, republicans proposed steep spending cuts but gave no ground on president obama's call to raise taxes on the wealthiest americans. here's what the president told bloomberg's white house correspondent about that. >> unfortunately the speaker's proposal right now is still out of balance. you know he talks, for example, about $800 billion worth of revenue but was he says he's going to do that by lowering rates. when you look at the platte it doesn't work. when i've said is, i am prepared to work with the speaker and democrats and republicans to go after excessive health care costs in our federal health care system, we're going to have to strengthen those systems and i think we can do that without hurting seniors, without hurting beneficiaries. i think that, you know, there's probably more cuts that we can squeeze out, though we've made over a trillion worth of spending cuts. >> you'll remember only a week ago the democrats proposed their solution to this and it was rejected by the republicans. the president is reiterating that taxes have to go up
, but as secretary geithner said over the weekend, as, i think, president obama conveyed in the interview today with bloomberg tv, he remains confident we can get this done. he remains optimistic that once republicans accept that there is no deal without an acknowledgement and acceptance that rates have to go up on higher end earners that, well, we can find a compromise here that resolves the fiscal cliff and takes a very important step towards the kind of broad balanced deficit reduction package that do enormous good to the economy. the kind of package i should not leave out with targeting investments so the economy continues to grow and create jobs. as i said on occasions, deficit reduction in and of itself is not a goal, but part of the plan that is focused on economic growth and job creation. president's very focused on that. jay? >> just a second ago, you referred to how the debt ceiling, taking it off the table, needs to be part of the deal. you referred to the economy, you called held hostage by the ideological team. you were aware of this, senator obama was against -- >> we addressed th
increase on the rich but also will blame the republicans if we go over the fiscal cliff, and this gives, frankly, this gives the white house and this gives the obama administration much more bargaining leverage. >> well, the former treasury secretary has one thing to say but many other voices are a virtual kcacophony where wolf blitzer has to sit every day. >> in the short term the president has more leverage right now because if they do nothing, let's say they avoid any legislation between now and the end of the year, starting january 1st we go over that so-called fiscal cliff, tax rates go up not just for the rich but for the middle class, for everyone, all those cuts in domestic spending and naths security spending, they go into effect. people aren't going to be happy about that, and the president will be able to say, look, i begged them, i repeatedly said 98% of the american public, they wouldn't get a tax increase if we just took them out of the equation, let's pass legislation extending the bush tax cuts for everyone earning under $250,000 a year. they didn't do it. so, you know,
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10